Giudici, Giudici di Tribunale, e Magistrati

18% (Rischio Minimo)

Rischio Minimo (0-20%): Le professioni in questa categoria hanno una bassa probabilità di essere automatizzate, poiché richiedono tipicamente la risoluzione di problemi complessi, creatività, forti competenze interpersonali e un alto grado di destrezza manuale. Questi lavori comportano spesso movimenti manuali intricati e una coordinazione precisa, rendendo difficile per le macchine replicare i compiti richiesti.

Ulteriori informazioni su cosa sia questo punteggio e su come viene calcolato sono disponibili qui.

Sondaggio degli utenti

Sentimento

Il seguente grafico è incluso ovunque ci sia una quantità sostanziale di voti per rendere i dati significativi. Queste rappresentazioni visive mostrano i risultati dei sondaggi degli utenti nel tempo, fornendo un'indicazione significativa delle tendenze di sentimento.

Salari

Molto ben retribuito rispetto ad altre professioni

Nel 2023, il salario annuo mediano per 'Judges, Magistrate Judges, and Magistrates' era di 148.910 $, o 71 $ all'ora.

'Judges, Magistrate Judges, and Magistrates' hanno ricevuto un salario 209,8% superiore al salario mediano nazionale, che si attestava a 48.060 $

Salari nel tempo

Commenti

Leave a comment

David Lee (Molto probabile) 16 days ago

Most of the Judges work is determining the outcome of a case, using the factual similarities with other cases verdict. This is repetitive work.

0 0 Reply

Infernus (Basso) 22 days ago

Because Robots cant understand and have empathy, only logic

0 0 Reply

Exactlyyyy (Nessuna possibilità) 5 months ago

You need to have empathy and be humane in addition to understanding the law itself. I also dont think society would allow a computer to pass a verdict.

0 0 Reply

Y (Incerto) 2 years ago

I think it really just depends on our ethics. We could either go dystopic or continue to be semi-nice humans.

0 0 Reply

Rei (Nessuna possibilità) 2 years ago

Unless AI can develop what you call "feeling", "empathy", and "decisiveness", it's quite hard to change how judges work. The job is not only about guilty or not, or who is right, but also about how the people around your place evaluate what is a crime and what is right.

0 0 Reply

I ate your burger that you left in the fridge (Incerto) 3 years ago

Honestly, I'm leaning towards no, but I'm already seeing some robot lawyers. And if lawyers are replaced, won't judges be replaced as well? But yet again, judges make laws. And it is a bit hard to imagine a robot making laws.

0 0 Reply

N (Small Chance) 3 years ago

I don't think judges will be replaced by AI/robots. Like someone else said, judges do not only follow laws, they also help make them. Imagine a robot help make a law, it's hard to imagine for me. I also feel that sure, technology will improve later, and robots will be more like humans, and possibly be better than many of them. But I feel like judges are in an OKAY, spot.

0 0 Reply

john (Molto probabile) 3 years ago

At least a robot will be impartial and cannot be bribed

0 0 Reply

marc (Basso) 3 years ago

Sentencing is grounded on choice.

0 0 Reply

K (Basso) 4 years ago

small chance because when judges will be automated then lawyer need to be automated

0 0 Reply

Darp (Nessuna possibilità) 4 years ago

Why are you argumenting the percentage with the grey area of the job? It's
an argument for why they won't be replaced in my opinion. Just imagine a drug dealer and a
person having the drug because they believe it would help their dying grandmother, how can they both serve the same sentance for possesion?

0 0 Reply

Judgemental (Molto probabile) 5 years ago

Judges are people who have prejudices based upon experience and are unconsciously biased. The same case tried by all judges would never produce the same outcome. It’s a flawed system, and a lottery. Good luck to those who are innocent and falsely accused.

0 0 Reply

jac 5 years ago

judges dont just follow laws. they change laws and base decisions on moral grey area and circumstance. perhaps traffic court will have robot judges but i doubt we will ever see a robot in federal or supreme courts. mercy, compassion, and social understanding should never be expected from a machine.

0 0 Reply

Elliott (Molto probabile) 5 years ago

Laws are very easy to interpret, I'm very sure the Internet already has the answer to 99.9% of all questions regarding whether something should be categorized as a felony or not. The United States has made up its mind on almost everything, I don't think judges really use their imagination to do this job, they just follow instructions as guided in the rules book.That's why I think the chances are much higher than 40%.

That's why I think the judges' probability of automation is closer to 95% than 40%, much like the accountants.

0 0 Reply

Legal Services (Extremely unlikely) 5 years ago

Laws by definition are not very easy to interpret. Hence the necessity to have lawyers and Judges deliberate in court over the interpretation of different laws and Acts and is why, for example, in Australia we have the Acts Interpretation Act.

I agree with jac. I think it's highly unlikely Judges will be replaced by robots/A.I. anytime in the near or distant future if at all not only because of the complicated nature of what their jobs entails, secondly, the human touch required to do so as jac touched upon and, thirdly, because on a deeper, more philosophical but also more tantamount level, to do so would, essentially, be surrendering our core and fundamental power as human beings to govern our own kind. If we were to hand over judiciary powers and control to A.I. we would effectively be putting mankind on the bench forever. It would tear the core fabric of our humanity and everything the human race has achieved thus far in all antiquity and hopes to achieve in all future and for those reasons and more, I believe, simply could not and would not ever happen.

So, realistically, I think the automation risk level of this particular category should be reassessed to almost zero because anyone in their right mind with any semblance of logic and understanding of the justice system couldn't possibly surmise that it could realistically be awarded a percentile score that such could happen higher than that.

0 0 Reply